ob�����ӿ�

It is being reported as a scrap, which I'm not sure is accurate.

But if it is, it is a shame and probably a lesson for the combatants, who are both supposed to be on the same side.

But under MMP, is anyone on the same side?

Act are concerned about ACC and their current desire to solve safety issues in the manufacturing sector.

But by putting a race-based lens across it, ACC want people who have answers, or programmes, for injuries to Māori and Pasifika.

This of course is not what the Government is supposed to be about and a Cabinet edict says so.

The shame of this is both sides, in fact all three sides, are at one on the issue.

They campaigned on the issue and they campaigned on it because the last Government got so obsessed with Māori issues and language and acquiescing to everything cultural that a large swath of voters got thoroughly sick and tired of it.

So why we are here after a year-and-a-half and a Cabinet instruction is beyond me.

The fact ACC, or any Government department, are still trying this on is the real problem.

It goes to a theme we have highlighted too often this term and that is that a public service don’t appear to be neutral, or operating under the instruction of the Government of the day, but rather to their own beat.

There is no good news in two parties seemingly debating a formally agreed approach with each other and there is no good news in a department continuing to do something they shouldn’t.

We have enough to deal with at the moment without previously agreed approaches being re-litigated or disavowed.

Obviously work safety is not a race-based problem. It is an industry or sector problem and ACC should know this. Even if they didn’t, they should be following instruction.

Act are on the right side of this.

But they shouldn’t have to be given the point of Government is enactment of policy, not endless re-litigation.